Add x_explicit_api_mode to remaining kotlinc_options #607
Conversation
pettermahlen
requested review from
cgruber,
jin,
restingbull and
timpeut
as code owners
|
Support for this was already added here #576. Does it not work? |
|
No, it's not working, for some reason, although I hadn't even noticed this PR, nor the fact that the options are in fact documented here https://bazelbuild.github.io/rules_kotlin/kotlin.html#kt_kotlinc_options... I'm new to Bazel, but it looks like the |
|
Hm, the reason I made this change was that my BUILD file does the following load (as per the README): And AFAICT, core.bzl loads from kotlin/internal, or https://github.com/bazelbuild/rules_kotlin/blob/master/kotlin/internal/opts.bzl, which in turn points to the files I changed in this PR. Assuming I read the code right, I am a complete newbie as mentioned. There seems to be 8 opts.bzl files in the repo (including one named opts.release.bzl). Is that what's causing the issue? |
|
Ah so the solution here is to replicate the existing |
pettermahlen
force-pushed
the
explicit-api
branch
from
435339d
to
3efb56f
Compare
pettermahlen
changed the title
pettermahlen
force-pushed
the
explicit-api
branch
from
3efb56f
to
baa988d
Compare
|
Done. AFAICT, it was only the 1.5 file that was missing the option. |
|
Lgtm but @cgruber or @restingbull will need to merge this |
See https://github.com/Kotlin/KEEP/blob/master/proposals/explicit-api-mode.md for more about the switch itself.
I'm not sure how to test this - the best test would be to have some test code with default access modifiers and explicit-api=strict set, and then run a compilation and verify that it fails. That seems complex, and like it would require a fair amount of tooling, which I'm not sure if it's available. Please advice if so.